Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Papers please

By Libby
Updated below

I just posted on this at Newshoggers, but it's disturbing enough that I want to rewrite it to post it here. Via John Cole's comment section, more proof of the impending police state.

The Transportation Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security are quietly pushing for a set of crazy new rules. All travellers in the U.S. will be required to get government-issued credentials and official clearance before every flight, both within the United States as well as internationally.

And Monday we received a new political action alert from Edward Hasbrouk, The Practical Nomad blogger who's been fighting the plan (and who testified about it at a TSA hearing). "The international Advance Passenger Information System rules were published, as 'final' effective February 19,2008, with no further opportunity for public comment even on the changes from the original proposal."

That's domestic flights too. How much of a stretch is it really from this, to imagine having to surrender your papers to cross the state line in your car? Or even the city limits?

And then there's this expansion of the terrorist watch list. It has 755,000 names on it right now and it's growing by 200,000 a year. Experts say it's inconceivable that there could be that many terrorists. Judging from the number of academians and other respectable critics of the administration who have been denied entry to the country based on that list, I'd say they were right.

Update: Thanks to Newshogger reader Kat for pointing us to this new info. The hearing period on the rules has been extended by 30 day to November 21, 2007. More commentary and additional links here.

[Thanks to The Blog Report for linking in.]

[cross-posted to The Reaction]

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

6 Comments:

Anonymous swampcracker said...

All travellers in the U.S. will be required to get government-issued credentials and official clearance before every flight, both within the United States as well as internationally.

I am surprised the traveled-related service sector isn't protesting loudly in the halls of Congress. What have we become? A nation of sheep!

12:16:00 AM  
Blogger Capt. Fogg said...

Baaaaahh!

10:00:00 AM  
Anonymous lester said...

well at least there's one upside to it

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/016411.html

that's making lemonade out of a lemon the american way

10:14:00 AM  
Blogger Libby Spencer said...

Swampcracker, I expect many people don't even know about it.

LOL Fogg

And LOL to you too Lester. Hilarious link. Free market at work.

10:48:00 AM  
Blogger cybersaur said...

The U.S. Supreme Court also dealt with the right to travel in the case of Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999). In that case, Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, held that the United States Constitution protected ... the right to travel among the states: the right to enter one state and leave another, the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than a hostile stranger

4:11:00 PM  
Blogger Libby Spencer said...

I'm not familiar with the case cybersaur but let's face it, rule of law is not an impediment to this administration.

6:34:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home